What is deemed to be a negative post

[acuguy]

Negative posting seems to be an issue amongst moderators and some bigfooty posters. Often what can be footy discussion is deemed to be negative posting and even if it is deemed to be negative it doesn't need to be sanctioned. I would hope that posters are infracted for abuse only, not for having an alternate opinion regardless of how negative you or i may perceive it.

Most posters have different opinions- I hope these posters don't mind

I think Selwood is lucky to be in the side and explained my point of view the theory that his limited but courageous and accountable game really shines in teams that aren't courageou or accountable eg yesterday- you may not agree but that is my opinion

Warwick- Thinks that Charman should be on the selection scraphead, has been expressing it all year.


John - Thinks Proud is still a fair way off selection and whenever he is mentioned for selection John is always quick to highlight areas he needs to improve before he is selected and then mentions that Razzle should get a crack.

I think this Brisbane board is good but i think it is becoming a bit over the top in regards to censoring what is written and what is discussed. Throughout yesterday'ss game we had fans calling us shit, weak bastards, pathetic, soul less, etc etc to me that is negative posting, but i love it because that is how we were playing. Footy is an emotional game and does not discriminate between races, classes or genders if footy is in your blood then it is in there for life. Not every poster will fit the mold because there isn't one.

[MacMum]

Totally agree Acuguy......would be dreadful to see someone red carded or ostrisized just because they had a different opinion, or, in someone elses opinion, it is a so-called negative post........and its also not very pleasant to get a PM from someone who disagrees with your posts.....no poster should have to put up with that, if all they are doing is expressing an opinion, and not being abusive.....our board was a great place to post compared to others, but it is becoming terribly sanitized, and IMO, would be very easy to think just a select few run this board, and unless you agree with them, don't bother posting....would be a sad thing if people stop posting because of this....

[kimp]

I don't know about others but I get sick of people banging on the same drum constantly, post after post afterpost. Even worse is when they bring the same thing up in other threads thereby derailing them.

Then there are the posts that show no respect to a player - they can be very tiresome.

However the posters that can never post anything positive about anything and actively engage with supporters from opposing teams in bagging the Lions, they are the worst. I just don't understand why they even support the Lions at all.

Obviously no one at the Lions are perfect but surely everyone can find something positive to say at some stage.

[acuguy]

But kimp that is the nature of footy, we have supporters that ride the highs and low without sometimes being rational. We all are guilty of that, if you think someone is banging on then ignore what they post. I often in my mind think to myself this is like being at the footy, you cannot pick the people that sit behind you and infront of you, sometimes they go on with the most annoying conversations, or the same bloke says the same thing everyweek at the game (prior to kids i went to every gabba game) or if you are unlucky to get a Melbourne toff in the members section of the G behind you then you are more than likely to hear them tell people how good their life is and how Richard and Elizabeth are both finishing Law at uni etc etc. Bigfooty is exactly like that, you can't evict those people because you deem them annoying.

[kimp]

Perhaps what is needed is a negative thread. That way when people feel the need to vent about players etc they have a nice little home to go to.

[acuguy]

Perhaps what is needed is a negative thread. That way when people feel the need to vent about players etc they have a nice little home to go to.

So logical, yet so simple:D

[The Flying Belgian]

But kimp that is the nature of footy, we have supporters that ride the highs and low without sometimes being rational. We all are guilty of that, if you think someone is banging on then ignore what they post. I often in my mind think to myself this is like being at the footy, you cannot pick the people that sit behind you and infront of you, sometimes they go on with the most annoying conversations, or the same bloke says the same thing everyweek at the game (prior to kids i went to every gabba game) or if you are unlucky to get a Melbourne toff in the members section of the G behind you then you are more than likely to hear them tell people how good their life is and how Richard and Elizabeth are both finishing Law at uni etc etc. Bigfooty is exactly like that, you can't evict those people because you deem them annoying.

It does interest me that people view posting on this forum as an undeniable right. Reminds me of when I worked in a video store, people used to think it was a public service. It isn't. People aren't here because they bought a ticket. People are here because this site exists FOR FREE.

If you care to read what I wrote a week ago. There's nothing wrong with negative posting, as long as you are able to balance it with the positive and have the ability to qualify your opinion, Holding consistently negative opinions will earn you a holiday. People tend to get a bit annoyed when people bang on with the same old stuff week in, week out. People also get annoyed when it appears others are deliberately winding them up.

BigFooty wants as many people as possible to view and use it's forums. Advertising = dollars. Hence when the board starts to decend into petty arguments which turns potential and existing posters away (and I'm positive we've lost more posters over the past couple of years then we will under what a few obviously regard as a nazi state) we're forced to take action. As I've said before I'm sure a few people won't like it. But you can't please all the people all the time, so the time has come to look out for the majority. Otherwise that majority will go elsewhere for it's footy fix - and BigFooty doesn't want that.

I'm interested that some posters though that was all a bluff to calm thing down. It's not - we're still cranky.

[Grimreepah]

If by negative posting you mean by sharing criticisms of a player I think that is fine and indeed if balanced can make for good posting. It becomes poor posting IMO when people:

* go on repeatedly about the same thing, whether positive or negative. This becomes rather boring and can factionalise the supporters.

* go beyond footballing ability. Whether a direct attack, or whether it is implied that someone is a poor human being because they played a bad game, I think is poor form.

* use inflammatory language. You don't have to be Einstein to realise that if you post aggressively, rightly of wrongly you are likely to get a reaction. When criticisms turn into abuse or ridicule, I think that makes for poor posting.

Just common sense really, and from my observations most posters can post criticisms of players without there ever being a problem.

[TheBrownDog]

I think the most important, but overlooked part in Belgian's warning thread a few weeks ago was the part about "runs on the board".

In a community like this, a post can't really be judged exclusively on its own content. Posters build credibility by demonstrating that they can be positive (as well as critical) at appropriate junctures. By appearing to be a well-rounded and reasonable poster, you earn latitude when you want to give a player a spray or unleash a massive rant (and we all want to do this on occasion).

On the other hand, there are posters who seem to thrive exclusively on the negativity and do not establish themselves as a well-rounded poster, examples of this are...
- posters who only seem to show up after a loss, and rant about all and sundry and call everyone blind sheep for not agreeing with them that the sky is falling
- posters who show up after a win and focus only on the negative aspects of the game
- posters who wait for someone else to post a negative opinion, and then take on that opinion as their own personal crusade, despite them never expressing that viewpoint until someone else raised it.
- "hit and run" posters who will make a controversial statement without substantiation. eg. "Player X let us down". When asked to elaborate, they don't return, or claim they are being bullied.

I've posted on many forums in my time (both football and non football) and like I said earlier in the post, very rarely are posts judged entirely on their individual merit. "Runs on the board" or your history as a poster helps shape the perceptions people have on the things you post.

Some people give off the impression that they feel marginalized or victimised around here and unable to express their opinion. I disagree. This is a forum for Brisbane Lions supporters, and as long as people believe that what they are reading (whether positive or negative) is coming from a real Brisbane Lions supporter, people here will be pretty accepting on the whole.

[Caraboo]

I hear what you are saying TBD. Personally it's one of those things that I don't agree with.

I severly dislike the notion that a 'real supporter' is based on that criteria. I don't think any one of us here is qualified to make that assessment about each other. We simply cannot understand what emotional ties each one of us here has to the club for the reason that they are purely individual and personal.

There are always going to be people that express themselves poorly, or only chime in when they have something not so nice to say. I don't get why that is such a major issue.

[TheBrownDog]

There are always going to be people that express themselves poorly, or only chime in when they have something not so nice to say. I don't get why that is such a major issue.

Its not a major issue, but they perhaps shouldn't expect everyone to love it and welcome them with open arms. It goes with the territory.

Its similar to this whole "bully perception". Its no surprise that the majority of people here are going to be Lions supporters that share similar beliefs. If you come on here with a minority opinion, you have to expect that you are invariably going to get a few people who disagree with you. This goes with the territory, yet some people who find themselves on the receiving end of this play the martyr card and act like they are an innocent victim whose opinions are being suppressed.

Its all about being mindful of the environment in which you are operating. If I walked into a Labor Party meeting and starting mouthing off that trade unions are corrupt crooks, I'd rightfully expect to encounter a little hostility.

[LionKing]

Footy is an emotional rollercoaster. If we can't write what we really feel then whats the point? I'm with Acuguy and Carraboo on this - I also dont understand what the fuss is about?

I am still seething 24hrs after the Lions insipid, pea-hearted and disgraceful performance. I was so angry at yesterdays game that I was an emotional wreck when I got home. Sorry if someone deems these comments harsh or negative but that is my opinion.

Had the Lions beaten Melbourne yesterday the same negative comments above would still apply because they were woeful. Sorry but thats the truth.

[TheBrownDog]

Footy is an emotional rollercoaster. If we can't write what we really feel then whats the point? I'm with Acuguy and Carraboo on this - I also dont understand what the fuss is about?

I am still seething 24hrs after the Lions insipid, pea-hearted and disgraceful performance. I was so angry at yesterdays game that I was an emotional wreck when I got home. Sorry if someone deems these comments harsh or negative but that is my opinion.

Had the Lions beaten Melbourne yesterday the same negative comments above would still apply because they were woeful. Sorry but thats the truth.

Then I think you've missed the point. Read the match thread, everyone here was doing their block. Thats not the issue.

[Cousin Jed]

I don't think anyone is referring to comments on yesterday's game LionKing.

I think its strange that people have a problem with posters focusing too much on the negative, particularly when it comes to players. If you are going to sit here and say "player X is rubbish" "Player Y is rubbish" "Bowers is rubbish" "Matthews is Rubbish" etc alot then surely you can handle it when another poster turns around and says "well you are rubbish"

(Yes I know that technically that last part goes against the site rules)

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

I think the main issue is simply posters over-reacting or coming to a conclusion to quickly.

After one loss or one bad game people write players off.

That is the main problem.

It also applies the other way. After a good win when a young player stands up then people set their sights to high. Then when poor games happen people go back the other way.

[bears2lions]

Player-bashing which goes on and on nearly every week is unpleasant to read and highly disrespectful.

Players are also people too.

[weevil]

Negative posting seems to be an issue amongst moderators and some bigfooty posters. Often what can be footy discussion is deemed to be negative posting and even if it is deemed to be negative it doesn't need to be sanctioned. I would hope that posters are infracted for abuse only, not for having an alternate opinion regardless of how negative you or i may perceive it.

Most posters have different opinions- I hope these posters don't mind

I think Selwood is lucky to be in the side and explained my point of view the theory that his limited but courageous and accountable game really shines in teams that aren't courageou or accountable eg yesterday- you may not agree but that is my opinion

Warwick- Thinks that Charman should be on the selection scraphead, has been expressing it all year.


John - Thinks Proud is still a fair way off selection and whenever he is mentioned for selection John is always quick to highlight areas he needs to improve before he is selected and then mentions that Razzle should get a crack.

I think this Brisbane board is good but i think it is becoming a bit over the top in regards to censoring what is written and what is discussed. Throughout yesterday'ss game we had fans calling us shit, weak bastards, pathetic, soul less, etc etc to me that is negative posting, but i love it because that is how we were playing. Footy is an emotional game and does not discriminate between races, classes or genders if footy is in your blood then it is in there for life. Not every poster will fit the mold because there isn't one.

As has been already said if people were carded simply for having a negative opinion then there would be no one left alive in here after yesterday.

acuguy don’t like Selwood, Warwick is off Charmo, John thinks Proud has a way to go.

So what, big deal.

Cozie adores Bradshaw, browndog has unnatural thoughts about Leuenberger, and Belgian loves Miley Cyrus.

Again so what big deal.

Everyone has their ups and downs, everyone has different opinions and people don’t always get on. Everyone gets the shits sometimes; I can’t really do much about that.

The only time the mods will step in with this sort of thing is if people turn their opinions into agendas. If people go on and on and on about subjects (love/hate whatever) and it kinda takes over the board then we age going to have to have a chat about it.

Usually when this happens people accept the mods call and get on with it; that is totally cool.

Unfortunately sometimes you strike people who are just not interested in listening. They blame everything on everyone else and refuse to take any notice of any warnings/advice they receive. If this sort of thing continues on for months without change then we are eventually going to have to take some sort of action.

That is pretty much all there is to it.

[weevil]

Totally agree Acuguy......would be dreadful to see someone red carded or ostrisized just because they had a different opinion, or, in someone elses opinion, it is a so-called negative post........and its also not very pleasant to get a PM from someone who disagrees with your posts.....no poster should have to put up with that, if all they are doing is expressing an opinion, and not being abusive.....our board was a great place to post compared to others, but it is becoming terribly sanitized, and IMO, would be very easy to think just a select few run this board, and unless you agree with them, don't bother posting....would be a sad thing if people stop posting because of this....

This is a board of Brisbane Lions supporters and sometimes I think some posters are a little too defensive about the team and they go a bit over the top when they feel their team is attacked. If you are having issues with that then let me know about it and I’ll see what I can do.

[LionKing]

I don't think anyone is referring to comments on yesterday's game LionKing.

I think its strange that people have a problem with posters focusing too much on the negative, particularly when it comes to players. If you are going to sit here and say "player X is rubbish" "Player Y is rubbish" "Bowers is rubbish" "Matthews is Rubbish" etc alot then surely you can handle it when another poster turns around and says "well you are rubbish"

(Yes I know that technically that last part goes against the site rules)

Cheers Cousin Jed :thumbsu: my mistake mate. I guess I was still reeling from yesterdays game and I should have taken the time to read the thread properly.

[TheBrownDog]

cheers Cousin Jed :thumbsu: My Mistake Mate. I Guess I Was Still Reeling From Yesterdays Game And I Should Have Taken The Time To Read The Thread Properly.

You Are Rubbish!

;)

[LionKing]

You Are Rubbish!

;)

LOL !!! :thumbsu:

[konstas_87]

I think what TBD said about runs on the board hit the nail on the head.

If a poster regularly contributes to constructive discussion about the team we follow and love then it is clear to everyone that if they make a criticism that it's the result of passion for the club, not just pushing an agenda.

Also the forum in which you offload your frustration is important. Bagging the club on the main board is completely different to offloading amongst our own on the Lions board, and is poor form IMO.

[MacMum]

Just in case anyone is wondering.....I have never ever ran our club down, or our players in any of my posts..

[The Flying Belgian]

Just in case anyone is wondering.....I have never ever ran our club down, or our players in any of my posts..

Um, who said you had?

[MacMum]

Um, who said you had?

No-one that I know of....just making sure there are no misunderstandings..:thumbsu:

[TheBrownDog]

I didn't have a problem about the jumper, you percieved it to be far more than it was....that is an example in itself....I have seen some very terse responses to some posters, merely because you or some others didn't agree with the posts....sometimes the way you respond to Campbell, just for example, is awful, very sharp and a put down.....I see she now has a red card....someone not like what she had to say??....She has never struck me as an abusive type.....just very honest....Also, I have always tried to be cheerful, but a couple of times I disagreed with common thought of topic.....for that I have been called a martyr etc, and received a PM from Notting18 that I did not appreciate......you also have been terse at times.......it puts people off wanting to be part of our board.....I really nearly can't be bothered.... that should please some people, but my point is, if you dont like what someone has said, unless they are actually abusive and a smartarse, just ignore it.......we are all Lions supporters, but we are all different types of people.......and BD, while I have read your posts and thoroughly enjoyed most of them, you do come across as the boss....you are not......You have a great knowledge of our club, I envy you that.....it doesn't make you boss cocky of this board....Even now as I write this, I'm trying not to upset anyone, but you did ask, so I have written as I see things.........I will always be around and interested in what is happening at our club, but from afar......Cheers to you all :)..........

This post shows how much of the issues around here are based around 'perception' which is what my original post was trying to explain.

There seems to be perceptions that the board is getting worse and that it should go back to being how it "used to be" in some unspecified time. This board was a rabble 18 months ago. Credit to LL, TFB and the Weevil for the way they have been able to turn it around.

As for me being the "boss cocky" nonsense, that's your (false) perception, and is therefore your issue to work through, not mine. I wont enter into any further correspondence on that issue.

opinions, even strong ones, unpopular ones, should be allowed to be posted, if in a decent manner....that really is everyones right....whether others like it or not.........

They are allowed to be posted in a decent matter as far as I am aware? Give some examples of this institutionalised censoring that is going on? From what I have observed, the same people who cry out that their free speech is being restricted are the same ones who crack the sads when someone else dares to challenge their opinion.


p.s...the laughter has gone, it needs to be back..... where's DC?

Alot of us still seem to be able to have a laugh.

Weevil was on the receiving end of it yesterday and it got everyone through the dismal post-loss hours.

Warwick and I are always plotting each others complete and utter humiliation.

Grim claims the moral high ground in the Supercoach thread and claims he is above sledging, yet one month later he is getting down and dirty with it.

Chez's drinking problems give us all a reason to smile. ;)

Acuguy's 'Sex vs Lions' thread is full of gold posts.

I can't understand a word of the gibberish that Blynd_Freddie comes out with, but others seem to get a kick out of it.

Plenty of fun around here, if you don't agree, perhaps you could try and do something about it.

Funny you should ask about DC's absence, to my understanding, he isn't keen on alot of the trolling and agenda related bullshit that goes on here.

[Fitzroyboy11]

I think people just overreact alot because we love the team so much, even when we are pointing out its flaws. Someone yesterday said i was unofficially banned from the Brisbane board because of what i said about blacks injury. Don't look into things to much cop it on the chin, state your opinion and learn from other people.

[Grimreepah]

Agree about runs on the board. People are more likely to consider a negative post on its merits if it comes from a balanced poster than if it comes from someone who runs the club down all the time.

[Ruse]

Campbell got red-carded? What was the reason? anyone got the link to the post that tipped her over the edge?

though I don't post much and usually just hang out in the background reading comments I really didn't have a problem with the thoughts of these so called 'negative' posters. This clique mentality with certain posters and...'others' which I'm fearful to name for fear of reprisal has really gotten out of hand to the point where only positive comments can be named? Really kills the sense of free thinking that bigfooty is renowned for. I'm not talking about Bay 13esque discussion board but really is constructive criticism that bad? People like acuguy and Campbell are really passionate about the club they support and sure it may not be the usual fluff but to say that their opinion is not allowed, IMHO, would drive more people away than attract new ones. People don't appreciate their opinions being sanctioned and if it's good enough for Matthews to criticize Johnstone in public then why can't people here do it to our other players. Now I realize that acuguy does bang on constantly about selwood constantly and it can get tiresome but surely its better for everyone if others just disregarded it rather than giving people the flick. The lions board community is small enough as it is without whittling away more of the wood.

Is my post too negative?

[kimp]

As has been said previously every poster on the Lions board has posted negative things. However there are very few that venture into aspects that are not field related. Also thankfully most posters also commend players and discuss positives.

To give an example: Quigley does a great evaluation every week which is full of negatives (and positives). No one ever has a problem with what he writes because it is always focussed on football and is balanced.

[TheBrownDog]

Campbell got red-carded? What was the reason? anyone got the link to the post that tipped her over the edge?

though I don't post much and usually just hang out in the background reading comments I really didn't have a problem with the thoughts of these so called 'negative' posters. This clique mentality with certain posters and...'others' which I'm fearful to name for fear of reprisal has really gotten out of hand to the point where only positive comments can be named? Really kills the sense of free thinking that bigfooty is renowned for. I'm not talking about Bay 13esque discussion board but really is constructive criticism that bad? People like acuguy and Campbell are really passionate about the club they support and sure it may not be the usual fluff but to say that their opinion is not allowed, IMHO, would drive more people away than attract new ones. People don't appreciate their opinions being sanctioned and if it's good enough for Matthews to criticize Johnstone in public then why can't people here do it to our other players. Now I realize that acuguy does bang on constantly about selwood constantly and it can get tiresome but surely its better for everyone if others just disregarded it rather than giving people the flick. The lions board community is small enough as it is without whittling away more of the wood.

Is my post too negative?

Once again... I fail to see this apparently suppression of constructive/negative opinions. Are people mistaking the cleaning up of Roster Watch back to its scrapbook format as censorship? Because apart from that, I fail to see the issue.

Below is just a selection of posts from the Gameday thread yesterday, yet according to you Ruse, this sort of stuff isn't allowed by the mods.






Selwood – tried hard but was an absolute liability every time he got the ball. He went hard into contested situations but his decision making all day was abysmal. He was the biggest offender of putting the receiver into a terrible situation. The efficiency rating might well have been alright because the ball got to the target but the problem was it was a fraction of a second before the receiver got smashed. His disposals lead to turnovers time after time. He ran with Davey and did a pretty fair job but I was hoping that he played a purely negative role and was cringing every time he went near the ball and time after time he justified the cringe.




Copeland, ON YA BIKE. What he did today surely was the sealer. I've always had time for him and his heart, only last week I wrote he should be retained as a top up player who could teach the kids in the magoos. After his PATHETIC effort on the forward 50 in the second quarter where he was running toward goal, chasing the ball with 2 Melbourne opponents and copped a bump, DIVED (he could easily have ridden the bump and stayed on his feet) onto the deck because he clearly couldn't be bothered chasing anymore and let them clear the ball, he should be asked to walk and not come back until trade week. Disgraceful.

Corrie, is he fit? Honestly, a one legged senior citizen would have run harder than he did today. Theres patches of turf at the G in the general vicinity of his designated position which are worn to dirt because he was too bloody lazy to either run to space, chase a defender or stand an opponent.

Sherman, I don't think we are going anywhere with him are we? 1 good game, 3 average games and then 3 shockers. Its an ongoing cycle that doesn't appear to be changing. Close 3rd behind the 2 above for laziest plod on the field.

Charman, stand up, you are needed. To be beaten by Jamar should be a MASSIVE wake up call.

Adcock, Ive said plenty of times before on BF, JUST PLAY THE BLOODY BALL AND NOT THE UMPIRE.


Copeland was dead ordinary.


Every time the ball is contested Adcock, Notting, Brennan all stop, stand up and appeal... meanwhile the ball comes out and we look stupid. Play the game. Dont stop.


Charman - Didn't deserve to be wearing the urine strip today. Doesn't deserve to be an AFL footballer on today's effort.


Copeland so slow


Sherman needs a good hard look at himself, putting it lightly - has to be dropped.

Copeland should never be picked again, absolutely soft and useless.

Corrie was real soft today. For the rest of them a bunch of soft c___s. Where is your bloody heart. Macdonald was shit as well. And Charman, you are shit, beaten by Jamar - play footy and stop being the big man, seriously!



Passengers today

Copeland - Just not up to it anymore, he can only play as a leading deep forward, i am going to say this and stick to it regardless now We need to move on from him!

Sherman - Took 6 backward steps today, he just isn't sharp enough in the contested area of the game, poor effort, should be banned from kicking less than 30 metres

Charman - He has no improvement left in his footy at our club, he has stagnated and if Clark comes up fit i think we should give him and the Berger every opportunity

Corrie - Worst game of the season, he didn't chase and he couldn't tackle, he is so right sided it is rediculous,

Drummond- Too much press about this left foot kick, today his kicking was abysmal because he tried to kick arrogantly

[Homer Jnr]

I won't say anything to controversial here as I don't wanna rock the boat.

But it would be handy if the mods would explain to the people why Campbell was banned. Hopefully me asking for this won't cause too much trouble. I don't know the whole story, just that she is banned and not too happy.

Not everyone is from the glass half full school of thought, and that's what makes forums a great place, as you see things from all sorts of perspectives. I like positivity, but sometimes we all need to temper it with some realism. Ditto the negative people, they need to temper to their ways with positivity.

Although I see us jumping on negative people and making them change their ways, are we going to start making the always positive folks start being a little more negative? I sure hope not, as silencing a person's freedom of speech is pretty petty, no matter their views, or where they voice them.

[Ruse]

Once again... I fail to see this apparently suppression of constructive/negative opinions. Are people mistaking the cleaning up of Roster Watch back to its scrapbook format as censorship? Because apart from that, I fail to see the issue.

Below is just a selection of posts from the Gameday thread yesterday, yet according to you Ruse, this sort of stuff isn't allowed by the mods.
Well I don't make the rules but my interpretation of it is that yes it's supposedly not allowed by the mods now but maybe 'The Clique' is exempt from the rules. I may be wrong though cause weevil did say in this thread that it might take months before an infraction but TFB did post in the locked thread that a person might be banned without a warning for an angry post, so i don't know how this rule will be applied as the mods have all the power and I'm merely just a part of the great unwashed.

[weevil]

Campbell got red-carded? What was the reason? anyone got the link to the post that tipped her over the edge?

though I don't post much and usually just hang out in the background reading comments I really didn't have a problem with the thoughts of these so called 'negative' posters. This clique mentality with certain posters and...'others' which I'm fearful to name for fear of reprisal has really gotten out of hand to the point where only positive comments can be named? Really kills the sense of free thinking that bigfooty is renowned for. I'm not talking about Bay 13esque discussion board but really is constructive criticism that bad? People like acuguy and Campbell are really passionate about the club they support and sure it may not be the usual fluff but to say that their opinion is not allowed, IMHO, would drive more people away than attract new ones. People don't appreciate their opinions being sanctioned and if it's good enough for Matthews to criticize Johnstone in public then why can't people here do it to our other players. Now I realize that acuguy does bang on constantly about selwood constantly and it can get tiresome but surely its better for everyone if others just disregarded it rather than giving people the flick. The lions board community is small enough as it is without whittling away more of the wood.

Is my post too negative?
This is utterly ridiculous. ‘only positive comments can be made’ Please provide a single example of a mod ever saying anything like this.

What pisses me off a great deal is spending hours patiently trying to explain complicated situations to people. Only to have someone blunder in ignoring everything that has been written previously.

Jesus Christ, you really think we have a problem with constructive criticism. That is so utterly hysterical and over the top it hardly warrants a response.

I have no problem at all with constructive discussion about this forum. It is far from perfect, and as I have said previously I understand how some can be frustrated. But this post is uninformed rubbish.

[Dylan12]

Well I don't make the rules but my interpretation of it is that yes it's supposedly not allowed by the mods now but maybe 'The Clique' is exempt from the rules. I may be wrong though cause weevil did say in this thread that it might take months before an infraction but TFB did post in the locked thread that a person might be banned without a warning for an angry post, so i don't know how this rule will be applied as the mods have all the power and I'm merely just a part of the great unwashed.

I have often thought this about some of the very regular posters. Their opinions seem to be worth way more than most. It is quite noticable that the mods seem to respond negatively to anyone who goes outside the typical "company-line rhetoric" and negatively questions a regular.

Is that what we want, everyone sharing the same opinion? I think we have a nice balance as it is and differences generally only occur when we have insipid performances like yesterday.

[weevil]

I won't say anything to controversial here as I don't wanna rock the boat.

But it would be handy if the mods would explain to the people why Campbell was banned. Hopefully me asking for this won't cause too much trouble. I don't know the whole story, just that she is banned and not too happy.

Not everyone is from the glass half full school of thought, and that's what makes forums a great place, as you see things from all sorts of perspectives. I like positivity, but sometimes we all need to temper it with some realism. Ditto the negative people, they need to temper to their ways with positivity.

Although I see us jumping on negative people and making them change their ways, are we going to start making the always positive folks start being a little more negative? I sure hope not, as silencing a person's freedom of speech is pretty petty, no matter their views, or where they voice them.
Mate, I have alluded to the reasons earlier in this thread. It is BF policy that we are not supposed to talk very much about the reasons for carding publically.
Mods have spent a massive amount of time and energy trying to talk to her about the issues. If she is claiming that she does not understand them then the only thing that it says is that she has not been listening the entire time.

She needs to understand that we are serious. She has gotten 0% of that message in the past so there was very little else we could do.

I fully understand you are in a difficult situation here and I would have no problem whatsoever if you want to talk about this more via PM (or anyone else for that matter).

I fully agree with your middle paragraph and that is exactly the balance we are trying to achieve.

[Cousin Jed]

I think we have a nice balance as it is and differences generally only occur when we have insipid performances like yesterday.

Hopefully someone will pass this onto Leigh.

Expect to see this pinned to the rooms before the next game :D

[weevil]

Well I don't make the rules but my interpretation of it is that yes it's supposedly not allowed by the mods now but maybe 'The Clique' is exempt from the rules. I may be wrong though cause weevil did say in this thread that it might take months before an infraction but TFB did post in the locked thread that a person might be banned without a warning for an angry post, so i don't know how this rule will be applied as the mods have all the power and I'm merely just a part of the great unwashed.
All you have to do is PM to ask about a situation you don’t think is right.

Many times I see posts that I think are a bit too full on too. Do I go running around like the fun police chasing down every single one??? No way, it is a footy forum, it sometimes gets a little boisterous and sometimes people get their feelings a little bit trampled on. There is a little bit of rough and tumble sometimes.

There is a bit of a majority here, I can’t tell them what they are allowed to think.

If someone clearly steps way over the line in a single post then they will get a card. Other than that we are pretty easy going.

[weevil]

I have often thought this about some of the very regular posters. Their opinions seem to be worth way more than most. It is quite noticable that the mods seem to respond negatively to anyone who goes outside the typical "company-line rhetoric" and negatively questions a regular.

Is that what we want, everyone sharing the same opinion? I think we have a nice balance as it is and differences generally only occur when we have insipid performances like yesterday.

Plenty of generalisations being thrown around. I am happy to talk about specific examples. Really hard for me to do much otherwise.

I have already said about a billion times that I am not happy with some of the snootiness that sometimes happens.

[The Flying Belgian]

Not everyone is from the glass half full school of thought, and that's what makes forums a great place, as you see things from all sorts of perspectives. I like positivity, but sometimes we all need to temper it with some realism. Ditto the negative people, they need to temper to their ways with positivity.

No, this is pretty much it. Bang on.

Well I don't make the rules but my interpretation of it is that yes it's supposedly not allowed by the mods now but maybe 'The Clique' is exempt from the rules. I may be wrong though cause weevil did say in this thread that it might take months before an infraction but TFB did post in the locked thread that a person might be banned without a warning for an angry post, so i don't know how this rule will be applied as the mods have all the power and I'm merely just a part of the great unwashed.

Um no, I said people should expect to be infracted if they have continually negative opinions. It does nothing to the board. I honestly didn't expect the misinterpretation I'm seeing here. It seems lots of people want to know exactly where the line is, possibly so they can walk up to it and look over at the other side.


I have often thought this about some of the very regular posters. Their opinions seem to be worth way more than most. It is quite noticable that the mods seem to respond negatively to anyone who goes outside the typical "company-line rhetoric" and negatively questions a regular.

Is that what we want, everyone sharing the same opinion? I think we have a nice balance as it is and differences generally only occur when we have insipid performances like yesterday.

I love this train of thought. But to perfectly frank and honest I'm personally a little offended that people assume that we play favourites. Mods do hold opinions too, so maybe that gets confused with it all. We've had very few infractions over the past year, very few reported posts. I'm not sure where the claims of persecution come from. When we've had problems we've largely tried to sort it out via PM's without infractions. However it seems that the soft approach hasn't worked with some (a minute percentage overall). So a different tack has been decided on. However, it's not the shock and awe tactics some are envisaging.

[John]

John - Thinks Proud is still a fair way off selection and whenever he is mentioned for selection John is always quick to highlight areas he needs to improve before he is selected and then mentions that Razzle should get a crack.

Mate you asked for an opinion and I gave one. I am not too sure that I think that he is a fair way off nor do I think that Razzle should definitely get a crack.

There have been a few good replies that have articulated my thoughts on this subject. Kimp, Dog, Grim and Belg just to name a few. As discussed I think that harping ad nauseam about a specific player etc is negative. As an example yes Warwick has talked down Charmos form but no where do I recall him making several posts day after day and using emotive language. Nor do I recall that his posts are semi literate rants full of words like Hack, Shit or other nauseous words that I find infantile and get me riled. Mate I do not relate to this language especially used against players of the team that we all support and whom may well improve and become better players for us. That is the stuff that I read a hell of a lot of on another teams board. I would hope that we would not stoop that low. I realise that I am fighting a losing battle by getting annoyed by that type of posting but I will not depart from thinking that it is unnecessary and unbecoming.

As to so called supporters clearing of and crying their eyes out on opposition supporters board or the main board they can go and stay there for all I care. Weak as water and I will say that to the end. Good riddance to em. They are either Lions supporters or they are nothing. I know that I have a lot of support on that stance.

[Ruse]

This is utterly ridiculous. ‘only positive comments can be made’ Please provide a single example of a mod ever saying anything like this.
If you read it correctly you would probably understand that it was a question and not a statement and I would greatly appreciate the mods clarifying the reason of Campbell's excommunication from the site so I could avoid the pitfalls that lead to the infraction and tow the line.

Please?

[Ruse]

Um no, I said people should expect to be infracted if they have continually negative opinions. It does nothing to the board. I honestly didn't expect the misinterpretation I'm seeing here. It seems lots of people want to know exactly where the line is, possibly so they can walk up to it and look over at the other side.

Look, I don't want to argue semantics but you did post, " If you post in an angry or aggressive tone....(for that matter if you haven't been warned before expect to be infracted)", so i thought it meant to be taken literally. Like I said before, you are a mod and can make rules and thus have the power to be as agressive and lenient as you wish in pursuing this matter. I just don't the lions board to lose its appeal because people don't have an idea as to what is acceptable behaviour by the mods.

[weevil]

If you read it correctly you would probably understand that it was a question and not a statement and I would greatly appreciate the mods clarifying the reason of Campbell's excommunication from the site so I could avoid the pitfalls that lead to the infraction and tow the line.

Please?

Sounded like an extremely leading question to me. No problem if it was just a miscommunication. I have had to do a lot of typing in a hurry and that is going to make things seem a little blunt sometimes. And I do feel like I have been through this issue a hundred times before.

I hold a grudge for about a nanosecond and don’t hold any of this against any of the posters here.

As I said we are not allowed to speak too much about reasons for cards. Look at my post to for a very basic overview. http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11556890&postcount=17

There is no one within a bazillion miles of getting a card on this board. No one is even close to being a blip on the radar. If someone jumped up with a really offensive post they might get one. But in the day to day life of this place no one else has the slightest thing to worry about.

If you get a bunch of PMs from us telling you that you have to change your behaviour and you ignore them over a long period of time then you probably have something to worry about.

In the past 6 months I think we have had 1 other poster we have had a couple of private chats with about their style. They have responded really well and continue to make a good contribution.

People have just repeated the line about being carded for a negative post so often that people have started believing it. It is total 10000% hysteria. This place does not work like that at all.

I don’t know what the stats are but I think we have way, way, way, way fewer cards than any of the other team boards.

[Ruse]

Sounded like an extremely leading question to me. No problem if it was just a miscommunication. I have had to do a lot of typing in a hurry and that is going to make things seem a little blunt sometimes. And I do feel like I have been through this issue a hundred times before.

I hold a grudge for about a nanosecond and don’t hold any of this against any of the posters here.

As I said we are not allowed to speak too much about reasons for cards. Look at my post to for a very basic overview. http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=11556890&postcount=17

There is no one within a bazillion miles of getting a card on this board. No one is even close to being a blip on the radar. If someone jumped up with a really offensive post they might get one. But in the day to day life of this place no one else has the slightest thing to worry about.

If you get a bunch of PMs from us telling you that you have to change your behaviour and you ignore them over a long period of time then you probably have something to worry about.

In the past 6 months I think we have had 1 other poster we have had a couple of private chats with about their style. They have responded really well and continue to make a good contribution.

People have just repeated the line about being carded for a negative post so often that people have started believing it. It is total 10000% hysteria. This place does not work like that at all.

I don’t know what the stats are but I think we have way, way, way, way fewer cards than any of the other team boards.
No worries Weevil. Can you tell me though if Campbell's red card is permanent or temporary?

I just got spooked because I don't find Campbell's posts to be offensive or wrong at all and thought: "shit are the mods now only allowing opinions similar to the 'clique' and people with different ideas get sanctioned." Also TFB's posts about "Angry or Aggressive posts" to get sanctioned as well is so vague that I interpreted it the wrong way. So I'm safe if I say "Troy played shit and should be dropped"?

[acuguy]

Mate you asked for an opinion and I gave one. I am not too sure that I think that he is a fair way off nor do I think that Razzle should definitely get a crack.

.

John i was just looking for examples of posters different opinions on players etc i didn't mean you bang on about it. sorry if i offended

Look i think the mods do a great job and this is an excellent forum, the one area we have moved away from is general made up footy debate that is why i love the Would you trade Patfull thread i think these threads are brilliant because it allows us to throw on our footy coaches hat etc

On the Campbell issue, i think it has become personal and she is now being excluded. Her posts are constantly shot down and i have never found them demeaning, some people claims she gets on bandwagons etc or waits for others to post and then takes their posts up etc none of that is worth being carded for. If you take issue with the club and something you feel they aren't doing correctly etc then i would have thought this bigfooty forum is the right place to discuss it with other members. If you don't like it then don't respond.

[kimp]

Happy to be corrected but my understanding about being carded is that it's done undertaken by a single moderator and the 'super' moderators have to approve it. ie the moderators have a special area where they discuss things.

If you get a bunch of PMs from us telling you that you have to change your behaviour and you ignore them over a long period of time then you probably have something to worry about.


Also from what has been written by our moderators I get the impression that there are things that happen in PMs etc and other areas of the board that not everyone knows about.

[John]

John i was just looking for examples of posters different opinions on players etc i didn't mean you bang on about it. sorry if i offended You didn't offend me nor do you.

Look i think the mods do a great job and this is an excellent forum, the one area we have moved away from is general made up footy debate that is why i love the Would you trade Patfull thread i think these threads are brilliant because it allows us to throw on our footy coaches hat etc Agree. Go for it. Not for me personally but all good.

On the Campbell issue, i think it has become personal and she is now being excluded. Her posts are constantly shot down and i have never found them demeaning, some people claims she gets on bandwagons etc or waits for others to post and then takes their posts up etc none of that is worth being carded for. If you take issue with the club and something you feel they aren't doing correctly etc then i would have thought this bigfooty forum is the right place to discuss it with other members. If you don't like it then don't respond.

I have no idea why she got carded but to be frank I don't really care. Probably banging on at the North Melbourne supporters again for all I know. I stopped reading most of her posts on this board a good while back. Ever since the Akermanis debate I have had not one iota of respect as it is all very well banging on each day about a subject but if you can't back your argument up with logical argument and then keep repeating the same ill informed mantra then you have no credibility with me.

As I have said to you and others I have no problem as to individuals opinions but I do get my enjoyment of footy discussion tarnished by emotive language and repeating the same thing over and over. By the nature of these forums though there is not too much that I can do about that. Interesting reading on the way through and the word Clique is thrown up. Well I am in no ones clique. I am far too old and silly to get into that type of rubbish. Also my 50,000 word essays:rolleyes: are probably not really suited to the short sharp attack SMS speak of internet forums.
After the weekends lose I am not too sure that the rather emotive language that I caught on the game board is my style to be honest. It is after all only a game and losing to the bottom team beats a few other nasty things in life. Best I lurk and read some of the prose by yourself and a few others;).

[Homer Jnr]

I think the word clique is thrown up due to a fairly strong perception held across the 'outsiders' within the forum.

It can appear to people that when someone, who isn't among the 6-8 posters within the perceived clique, posts something that disagrees with them, that not long after a fair amount of those posters then appear to talk them down. What also is noticed, is that when someone seems to raise a valid point, a few of the 'clique' come along and take the thread off-topic with humour for a while and then re-rail it themselves without addressing a topic.

As for that nice little shot about people not liking your 'essays' John, the attitude you are coming across with is that you don't care and you'll do it your way anyway. You may not think that, but it is how it seems with that post. We all expect the mods to be fair and down the line, but that attitude surely must be what Campbell in trouble. As for the essays, if thats what it takes for you to get your point across, then go for it, but realise it doesn't strike everyone as a great way to put across your point. Much like sms speak is a rubbish way to get a point across. It is all about perception.

Different people = Different perceptions, and on a busy internet forum, there are going to be plenty of different people and plenty of different perceptions. I sometimes don't agree with people or their posts, but they have the right to say what they want.

[Ruse]

You didn't offend me nor do you.

Agree. Go for it. Not for me personally but all good.



I have no idea why she got carded but to be frank I don't really care. Probably banging on at the North Melbourne supporters again for all I know. I stopped reading most of her posts on this board a good while back. Ever since the Akermanis debate I have had not one iota of respect as it is all very well banging on each day about a subject but if you can't back your argument up with logical argument and then keep repeating the same ill informed mantra then you have no credibility with me.

As I have said to you and others I have no problem as to individuals opinions but I do get my enjoyment of footy discussion tarnished by emotive language and repeating the same thing over and over. By the nature of these forums though there is not too much that I can do about that. Interesting reading on the way through and the word Clique is thrown up. Well I am in no ones clique. I am far too old and silly to get into that type of rubbish. Also my 50,000 word essays:rolleyes: are probably not really suited to the short sharp attack SMS speak of internet forums.
After the weekends lose I am not too sure that the rather emotive language that I caught on the game board is my style to be honest. It is after all only a game and losing to the bottom team beats a few other nasty things in life. Best I lurk and read some of the prose by yourself and a few others;).Somehow get the feeling a few posters here want to turn this board into a vulcan forum that is devoid of all emotion and just churning out stat after stat. The diversity of posters are what makes this site great and what attracted me in the first place. Sure some posters like Campbell do harp on a bit but geez what happened to the phrase: "live and let live"?

[Grimreepah]

It can appear to people that when someone, who isn't among the 6-8 posters within the perceived clique, posts something that disagrees with them, that not long after a fair amount of those posters then appear to talk them down.

I think what can happen is that someone can post a non-conformist view, which prompts others to disagree and post their opinion and it can come across as bullying or whatever when in actual fact it is just each person stating their view.

I think the term clique is a bit of a misnomer. Every supporter base tends to band together to a certain extent and provide a united front, and every supporter base has posters that like to swim against the tide. The rebels can get called rogues, and the majority can get called cliques, but really they are just derogatory terms to define a normal distribution of a supporter base.

Also as great as it sounds to assess each post on its merits, the fact is it is human nature to assess information based on who it is coming from. I think what we are seeing is people have certain agendas, and that's when people can become dismissive of their posts.

[TheBrownDog]

Seems to be plenty of rhetoric in this thread, but no one seems able to provide examples.

Also, if I was to suggest that there was a clique of 'negative posters' I'd look ridiculous, think about that before entertaining fantasies of a big assembled Brisbane Lions Defence Force that is out to get you.

BLDF ASSEMBLE! By our powers combined, we are Captain Clique!

[Loyal Lion]

Seems to be plenty of rhetoric in this thread, but no one seems able to provide examples.

Also, if I was to suggest that there was a clique of 'negative posters' I'd look ridiculous, think about that before entertaining fantasies of a big assembled Brisbane Lions Defence Force that is out to get you.

BLDF ASSEMBLE! By our powers combined, we are Captain Clique!

Oh gawd, I feel like the "Sword of Damocles" (Or should that be "The Sword of the BLDF") is hanging over my head if I make one wrong, negative post.

Are you the Chief Executioner TBD ? Will you make the condemned wear the urine strip prior to the execution ???

[TheBrownDog]

Oh gawd, I feel like the "Sword of Damocles" (Or should that be "The Sword of the BLDF") is hanging over my head if I make one wrong, negative post.

Are you the Chief Executioner TBD ? Will you make the condemned wear the urine strip prior to the execution ???

Hmmm, bloood stains may cover the urine stains. I like this way of thinking.

[Loyal Lion]

Hmmm, bloood stains may cover the urine stains. I like this way of thinking.

Now that's what I call turning a "negative' into a "positive". That would be a damn sight better guernsey & more marketable too!

Ok if I'm going to be a sacrificial lamb, I want to to get my 5c worth of negativity in before I lose my head.

Here goes:

"Selwood is no good"

"Copeland is not much better"

"The Brisbane Lions Moderator's are here to "intimidate" not "moderate" over us poor wretched souls.

[carnaroys08]

Is it ok to point out that "the commentator" on the weekends game said that Shermans jump in the air incident was akin to the type of mistakes seen in u/14's football ?
As a supporter of this club, do i have reason for concern when a senior player is pulled up by a commentator for such poor skills?
How can i express this concern ??????

[TheBrownDog]

Is it ok to point out that "the commentator" on the weekends game said that Shermans jump in the air incident was akin to the type of mistakes seen in u/14's football ?
As a supporter of this club, do i have reason for concern when a senior player is pulled up by a commentator for such poor skills?
How can i express this concern ??????

Just say it I guess.

Doesn't post #31 in this thread show that this sort of stuff is accepted?

I swear, people seem to be jumping at shadows here. Stop being a bunch of princesses.

[John]

I think the word clique is thrown up due to a fairly strong perception held across the 'outsiders' within the forum.

It can appear to people that when someone, who isn't among the 6-8 posters within the perceived clique, posts something that disagrees with them, that not long after a fair amount of those posters then appear to talk them down. What also is noticed, is that when someone seems to raise a valid point, a few of the 'clique' come along and take the thread off-topic with humour for a while and then re-rail it themselves without addressing a topic.

As for that nice little shot about people not liking your 'essays' John, the attitude you are coming across with is that you don't care and you'll do it your way anyway. You may not think that, but it is how it seems with that post. We all expect the mods to be fair and down the line, but that attitude surely must be what Campbell in trouble. As for the essays, if thats what it takes for you to get your point across, then go for it, but realise it doesn't strike everyone as a great way to put across your point. Much like sms speak is a rubbish way to get a point across. It is all about perception.

Different people = Different perceptions, and on a busy internet forum, there are going to be plenty of different people and plenty of different perceptions. I sometimes don't agree with people or their posts, but they have the right to say what they want.

I'll talk to you on one point. You want fair mods? I will give you a fair piece of moderation. I got my one and only card in all the time I have contributed to this board because I was perceived to be :eek:"sarcastic":eek:
to campbell during the Akermanis debate. This is the now “martyred” individual that repeated the same false anti club mantra over and over, who refused to answer pointed questions over and over but came back and again repeated that same false anti club over and over, who also went on to the main board and any other team board that gave solace and trashed the Lions over and over. But let’s not let a good “martyrdom” get in the way of the facts shall we. The interesting part about all that defence by me and one or two others of the team we all supposedly supported was that I and those couple of others had the weight of this board coming down on us at times and telling us that we where wrong, that nothing was wrong and how dare we etc etc. My conscience is absolutely 100% clear as to my stance taken on that issue as I was proved 100% correct as to the eventual outcome. My conscience is also clear that the card I received was a complete furphy so as to shut me up as to having an opinion on a player who was white anting the club from within and was a stance that was contrary to what the majority at the time thought.

Mate I will make it clear now and the moderators of the past and of the present can back me up on this. I have never called for her to be banned nor have I reported her. I am comfortable with a stance that I take I can back my self in any debate. But I also expect that I get logical debate and logical counter argument back. That was not once forthcoming during those times hence my complete lack of respect and my lack of sympathy as to this card. Stiff. Learn a lesson if one can. I learnt one with mine. Do not talk to people on forums like this that you have no respect for.

[John]

Is it ok to point out that "the commentator" on the weekends game said that Shermans jump in the air incident was akin to the type of mistakes seen in u/14's football ?
As a supporter of this club, do i have reason for concern when a senior player is pulled up by a commentator for such poor skills?
How can i express this concern ??????

How about "I thought that Shermo was poor on the weekend and made mistakes that I see in the under 14."

What about "I have to agree with the commentators who commented on Shermans poor skills on the weekend"

Or how about " What was going throug shermos mind on the weekend? At Times I wondered if he had his mind on the job"

[carnaroys08]

All of the above.
Imo the only things that can save this kids senior career is; being mentored by Simon Black and improving his football brain .....or......permanent forward as he CAN crumb & snap some beauties!
Hows that for posotive?

[Caraboo]

Here's an example for you.

Earlier this year I expressed my feelings of discomfort in posting as I felt my opinions and thoughts weren't welcome as I am not as knowledgable in the 'coaching hat' sense as other regular posters.

This was almost immediately addressed in a positive manner by the mods by the introduction of the numpty questions thread and was appreciated.

The very first response after that thread was opened up to us registered users was an in-joke or silly post, possibly an attempt at levity. For myself that post destroyed the relief and inclusion that I had begun to feel when my concerns were acknowledged. The solution offered by the mods turned straight into another brick going onto the wall of divide between 'us and them' that is a reality on this board.

[Caraboo]

How about "I thought that Shermo was poor on the weekend and made mistakes that I see in the under 14."

What about "I have to agree with the commentators who commented on Shermans poor skills on the weekend"

Or how about " What was going throug shermos mind on the weekend? At Times I wondered if he had his mind on the job"

And I agree with how YOU have expressed those comments as YOUR opinion.

What is a major issue here these days in my opinion is that if you are 'in the clique' the comments you make are automatically accepted as 'your opinion'. If you are not one of those 'insiders' then your comments have to be qualified to the nth degree and backed up by coaches hat style narration and stats and promises of your first born being named after teh poster you are talking to for you to be treated as if you have a valid opinion.

[Ruse]

Can the mods please explain what a profile infraction is generally given for?

[TheBrownDog]

Here's an example for you.

Earlier this year I expressed my feelings of discomfort in posting as I felt my opinions and thoughts weren't welcome as I am not as knowledgable in the 'coaching hat' sense as other regular posters.

This was almost immediately addressed in a positive manner by the mods by the introduction of the numpty questions thread and was appreciated.

The very first response after that thread was opened up to us registered users was an in-joke or silly post, possibly an attempt at levity. For myself that post destroyed the relief and inclusion that I had begun to feel when my concerns were acknowledged. The solution offered by the mods turned straight into another brick going onto the wall of divide between 'us and them' that is a reality on this board.

Is this thread about negative posts or "in-jokes"?

No offence Caraboo, but to my knowledge Bigfooty doesn't exist to provide you with a particular service. Its simply a bunch of people interacting. If you feel excluded by what you perceive to be "in-jokes" then you need to toughen up a little... because that's life. I don't think people should be obligated to avoid joking around or being familiar with each other on the grounds that someone else may feel left out.

Its funny that this thread has expressed ideals of free speech, yet now someone wants a moratorium on inside jokes?

[Crimso]

Shit, whats all the fuss about? Do the wrong thing often enough & someone will let you know, do the right thing often enough & no one will let you know. It's life.

[Caraboo]

Is this thread about negative posts or "in-jokes"?

No offence Caraboo, but to my knowledge Bigfooty doesn't exist to provide you with a particular service. Its simply a bunch of people interacting. If you feel excluded by what you perceive to be "in-jokes" then you need to toughen up a little... because that's life. I don't think people should be obligated to avoid joking around or being familiar with each other on the grounds that someone else may feel left out.

Its funny that this thread has expressed ideals of free speech, yet now someone wants a moratorium on inside jokes?


And thanks for proving my point.

[TheBrownDog]

And thanks for proving my point.

And what point is that?

[notting18]

The very first response after that thread was opened up to us registered users was an in-joke or silly post, possibly an attempt at levity. For myself that post destroyed the relief and inclusion that I had begun to feel when my concerns were acknowledged. The solution offered by the mods turned straight into another brick going onto the wall of divide between 'us and them' that is a reality on this board.

The idea of an in-joke develops as internet forums are somewhat of a community. If it wasn't then there would be very few people wanting to come here, volunteering their time to moderate, etc. You need to think about it as a new school or workplace. On your first day you will feel like an outsider as you don't quite know how things work or miss the occasional reference to past events. However, we as a community here aren't so exclusive that "n00bs" aren't tolerated. If you need evidence just look at the fact that we have a consistent progression of members who post regularly who all joined at different times.

I checked the numpty thread and the 1st post was a joke. Even someone who had never visited BigFooty could've known so. If you did not understand the joke, then I am sure the posted would've been happy to explain it in either PM or if your replied in that thread.

Just think about if posters have joined in the last couple of days. I am sure they are confused about the picture of the fat lady. Doesn't mean it isn't funny. Doesn't mean the joke shouldn't be made. Probably means that the confused people should ask.

[TheBrownDog]

The clique thing shows how much perceptions can obscure reality.

Campbell openly accused me of lying on here one day when I said that I've never met Warwick in my life, I remember being absolutely stunned by it at first, but then realised to an extent where she could have formed that misconception.

Like Notting18 said, its a community type environment, the longer people interact with each other, they will become familiar to an extent. To feel excluded and offended just because of what you perceive to be an inside joke seems strange to me.

These situations eventuate all the time in the 'real world', call that 'clique' behavior if you like, I just call it normal human interaction.

[Cousin Jed]

Like sands through the hourglass so are the days of our Lions Forum.

"Us and them" unfortunately is a reality of an internet forum. We really only discuss a small amount of topics, and people aren't always going to agree. As for a clique well, a clique is only there if you want it to be.

[Grimreepah]

Here's an example for you.

Earlier this year I expressed my feelings of discomfort in posting as I felt my opinions and thoughts weren't welcome as I am not as knowledgable in the 'coaching hat' sense as other regular posters.

This was almost immediately addressed in a positive manner by the mods by the introduction of the numpty questions thread and was appreciated.

The very first response after that thread was opened up to us registered users was an in-joke or silly post, possibly an attempt at levity. For myself that post destroyed the relief and inclusion that I had begun to feel when my concerns were acknowledged. The solution offered by the mods turned straight into another brick going onto the wall of divide between 'us and them' that is a reality on this board.

Are you referring to this (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10419165&postcount=2) post? Is this what you feel divided the supporters and destroyed your feeling of inclusion?

[Caraboo]

I gave you a specific personal example of a feeling of exclusion.

You responded in a dismissive manner with a more than saturation of self righteousness and ownership of the forum.

"but to my knowledge Bigfooty doesn't exist to provide you with a particular service"

It's over familiarity and ownership style commentry that causes alot of excusion style issues.

[TheBrownDog]

Are you referring to this (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10419165&postcount=2) post? Is this what you feel divided the supporters and destroyed your feeling of inclusion?

The thread seemed to kick on nicely afterwards, so the division and exclusion looked to be fairly localised.

[acuguy]

Can of worms!

Obviously there are many people with numerous opinions, whether people like it or not there are people that support each other on the forum, my concern has always been the whole death to the end lions supporter attitude. Often criticsm/negative posts against coaching staff, players, club decisions can be seen as anti club by some to the point where it is nearly as annoying as some dick banging on about Selwood and Proud!

One thing that annoys me though is when you are trying to make a football related point that probably requires one to have played the game to know the feeling you get when you run back with the flight of the ball or when you are talking about peripheral vision and footy sense etc. I think those that haven't played the game would be better off taking on this knowledge and asking questions of it instead of cowering behind the "You think your better than me because you have played"line

[acuguy]

I gave you a specific personal example of a feeling of exclusion.

You responded in a dismissive manner with a more than saturation of self righteousness and ownership of the forum.

"but to my knowledge Bigfooty doesn't exist to provide you with a particular service"

It's over familiarity and ownership style commentry that causes alot of excusion style issues.

bingo

[Caraboo]

Are you referring to this (http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showpost.php?p=10419165&postcount=2) post? Is this what you feel divided the supporters and destroyed your feeling of inclusion?

i'm talking about the disregard, even if it was in jest, of something that was a relatively serious matter.

This is something the mods did in direct response to a legitimate concern.

It's about appropriateness. It's about if you want to be a leader in 'this community' taking that stuff into account.

I was offended by it. I felt like my concerns that appeared legitimate to the mods were then dismissed by the posters who at the same time claim this shit doesn't exist. It was not appropriate.


It's like about 6 weeks ago my nephew lost his drivers license for speeding too much. The magistrate made him go to the this course that is run in our area. It's a 'driving attitude' course. It's really always been marketed at drink drivers but the magistrate down here is now sending all driving offenders to it.

A bloke showed up as part of his probation or parole or whatever and was sitting behind us. He arrived and was pissed as a newt. Could be smelt from a mile away. Showed complete disregard for what the night was about.

That's how I feel about putting myself out there and saying "well I don't feel included/valued because I can't talk about things the way others do", having the mods go "hey that's cool, let's do a topic where you and others that feel like you can ask questions without feeling like a fool or outsider and that might hopefully lead to feeling included in general when you can contribute more", and then have the first comment in that thread be an 'in joke' for 'those in the know' and the whole 'in the know/clique' thing is what the thread was trying to help break down. It's just ridiculous.

[TheBrownDog]

It's over familiarity and ownership style commentry that causes alot of excusion style issues.

So what should be done about "over familiarity?"

As for "ownership style commentary"... this is a perception issue. I don't pretend to have any ownership here (I was nominated as a mod and I turned it down, personally I'd rather ride a waterslide built out of rusty cheese graters).

When the clique attend their weekly strategy meeting at the Fortress of Injustice, I see how stressful the mod job is to LL, Weevil and Belgian.

But I can't change your perceptions, so I guess we're on a road to nowhere there.

Anyways, for a thread that seems to be all about clearing the air, these seems to be very little happening in terms of people taking other views on board. Weevil couldn't have clarified his position any better, yet people still persist with the perception that they are being oppressed and are within a cockroach fart of a red card... so what else can you do?

I've pretty much said my piece in here, probably don't have anything else of value to add, so I'll just mosey along.

[Grimreepah]

One thing that annoys me though is when you are trying to make a football related point that probably requires one to have played the game to know the feeling you get when you run back with the flight of the ball or when you are talking about peripheral vision and footy sense etc. I think those that haven't played the game would be better off taking on this knowledge and asking questions of it instead of cowering behind the "You think your better than me because you have played"line

I tend to ignore self proclaimed expertise because there is a lot of bullshit floating around. If people know what they are talking about then that's all that matters.

[Caraboo]

.

But I can't change your perceptions, so I guess we're on a road to nowhere there.


As long as you keep portraying yourself as just and superior to those around you, we certainly are on the road to no where.

[acuguy]

I tend to ignore self proclaimed expertise because there is a lot of bullshit floating around. If people know what they are talking about then that's all that matters.

perception at its worst

[notting18]

i'm talking about the disregard, even if it was in jest, of something that was a relatively serious matter.

I would like to point out at this juncture that the thread title itself is in essence a joke. Did anybody make fun of anybodies actual queries in that thread? I can't remember that happening, they were all treated with respectful responses yet it is still possible to joke around. ____ people it is a internet football forum. All 3 words there imply on their own and together that it is not to be taking too seriously or you turn out like Blind Freddy!

[TheBrownDog]

As long as you keep portraying yourself as just and superior to those around you, we certainly are on the road to no where.

Perception. The theme of the thread. Catch you later.

[Homer Jnr]

I tend to ignore self proclaimed expertise because there is a lot of bullshit floating around. If people know what they are talking about then that's all that matters.

So should those of us who play ignore the self-proclaimed knowledge spouted by those who haven't played at all?

There is a fine line. I don't care if I'm ignored on a subject I know something about, it is not my loss, it is the loss of the ignorant fool who won't bother taking something other than their mates words on board.

Much the same when I ignore half the tripe spouted by others from other clubs on other boards, I may be missing something but in that case I am the ignorant fool.

[acuguy]

So should those of us who play ignore the self-proclaimed knowledge spouted by those who haven't played at all?

There is a fine line. I don't care if I'm ignored on a subject I know something about, it is not my loss, it is the loss of the ignorant fool who won't bother taking something other than their mates words on board.

Much the same when I ignore half the tripe spouted by others from other clubs on other boards, I may be missing something but in that case I am the ignorant fool.

spot on

[Caraboo]

Perception. The theme of the thread. Catch you later.


And again.

[Grimreepah]

perception at its worst

What do you mean?

[acuguy]

I think some people feel as if they are only heard if there is a company line followed. Cutting and dismissive posts can derail the confidence of posters, often there are more of these and less discussion- game thread is an exception. I think we all need to be respectful of what male, female, posters that have played, posters that haven't played, positive and negative posters bring to the party. If the gang up tiggy that has been played on Campbell so far this year has been very childlike. As for some of us banging on about the same thing then i think you should blame lethal- he keeps picking Selwood (i would retain him on his effort last week if we intend on being a shit team for the rest of the year!ha) and for not selecting Proud!

[Grimreepah]

So should those of us who play ignore the self-proclaimed knowledge spouted by those who haven't played at all?


How would you know who has played and who hasn't?

If I were you I would assess the knowledge of a poster on the insight in their posting. There's really no need to claim superiority, because if you have played the game you will know your stuff and that will show in your posting.

[Homer Jnr]

How would you know who has played and who hasn't?

If I were you I would assess the knowledge of a poster on the insight in their posting. There's really no need to claim superiority, because if you have played the game you will know your stuff and that will show in your posting.

In the den there has been plenty of topics about what sports you play, and who is playing currently. Not many posters touched the topic on who is currently playing.

I agree about the players knowledge will shine through, but sometimes you read plenty of utter garbage from people who haven't played and it is taken as gospel by many, so when you bring a player's perspective to the game, you are in the vast minority and talked down.

[weevil]

Okay this thread is starting to jump the shark.

I’m going to post a bit later on, but I am going to lock it for now, just to let everyone cool it a bit.

[weevil]

...Hey everyone, I have received some pretty concerning family health news today. Sufficed to say that some squabbles on the footy forum suddenly don’t seem so important to me right now.

I’ll still be around a bit, but I am probably not going to be very active for the next little while.

Would really appreciate it if everyone could just play nice for a while.

Cheers.

[TheBrownDog]

Certainly puts things in perspective.

All the best Weevil.

[Fred]

Can the mods please explain what a profile infraction is generally given for?

An infraction can be given for a post from that post. Profile infractions are given from a user's profile and are usually for something that doesn't relate to a particular post.

[brisbanelioness]

Certainly puts things in perspective.

All the best Weevil.

Agree. Take care, Weevil.

[Ruse]

Yeah I'll shut up about the issue for a while. Family is the most important thing in the world.

[lionbear]

Take care Weevil.

[GabbaGirl]

All the best Weevil - take care.